Dr. Parvez Ahmed, national board
member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), wrote an
interesting “guest column” for the
St. Petersburg Times on September 27, 2004.The
column, titled: “Accusations of terrorist support are wrong, divisive”,
Dr. Ahmed makes some very interesting comments, which are simply not
true and are not supported by the facts.

Dr. Ahmed writes in the first sentence of his column:

“Public
debate, though often difficult, emotional and unavoidable, is a good
thing for an
open democratic society. Yet, it should not absolve anyone of the
responsibility to be
factual and accurate.”

So…Dr. Ahmed supports public debate,
as long as it’s the truth?Wonderful!This is one item mentioned by CAIR that Anti-CAIR
(ACAIR)
supports 100%.But…Dr. Ahmed also includes
the caveat:

“People who make statements connecting CAIR to terrorism should
understand the
legal consequences of their attempted slander and defamation. The First
Amendment
does not protect defamation.”

As all Americans who are even
peripherally familiar with the law know, making untrue statements can
be libelous.However, what if the charges
are true, that CAIR does indeed support and defend Islamist terrorism?What then?Are we
to remain silent in the face of a legal threat from CAIR officers?Just exactly what was Dr. Ahmed’s purpose in
making this statement?Is this a veiled
threat to anyone interested in investigating CAIR’s
true agenda?

Dr. Ahmed continues:

“CAIR
has always taken a principled
position on terrorism.”

Really?When did this miraculous event take place?Where can we go on the CAIR web site to read
about this new policy?Is it just possible
we missed CAIR’s press release?

So…we have a national
board member saying that CAIR is a peaceful group that condemns
terrorism…and we have the communications director saying that CAIR does
support terrorist groups, but not
publicly…just who are we to believe?Who
is the liar?

Dr. Ahmed makes reference to two CAIR
officers who are currently serving prison terms as examples of untrue
charges being made against CAIR.According
to Dr. Ahmed:

“Randall
Royer, a former employee of CAIR, was indicted on criminal acts
violating the seldom-used
Neutrality Act of 1794, which makes it unlawful for Americans to take
part in military enterprise
against any foreign state with which the United States is at peace.”

We previously reported on the activities of Mr. Royer…and
his conviction.As for exactly what Mr.
Royer was convicted of, this is what the Department of Justice
had to say:

“Royer, 31, pled guilty in January 2004 to a two-count criminal
information charging him with aiding and
abetting the use and discharge of a firearm during and in relation to a
crime of violence, and with aiding
and abetting the carrying of an explosive during the commission of a
felony. In his plea agreement, Royer
admitted to aiding and abetting co-defendants Masoud
Khan, Yong Ki Kwon, MuhammedAatique and
KhwajaMahmoudHasan
in gaining entry to a terrorist training camp in Pakistan
operated by Lashkar-e-Taiba,
where they trained in the use of various weapons. Royer also admitted
to helping co-defendant Ibrahim
Ahmed Al-Hamdi gain entry to the Lashkar-e-Taiba camp, where Al-Hamdi received training in the use
of a rocket-propelled grenade in furtherance of a conspiracy to conduct
military operations against India.”

As for Mr. Royer being a “former” employee…well, Dr. Ahmed is,
once again, playing fast and loose with the truth.Mr. Royer was working
for CAIR at the time of his crimes, and no wishful thinking is going to
change this fact.

Once again, we have an
apparent apologist for Islamist terrorism, an officer in the CAIR
organization, attempting to spin a story to make CAIR look like
something it isn’t: a key player in the Islamic community.

Cat
Stevens, Innocent Traveler or Islamist Terrorism Supporter?

An
interesting thing happened to Yusuf Islam (formerly known as Cat Stevens, before his conversion
to Islam) during his trip to the United
States from England.His plane was diverted, he was detained and questioned, and he
was sent back home.Why?Well, to hear from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, it
would appear to be a mistake.

But is it a mistake?Columnist Debbie Schlussel has written
an excellent commentary on Islam’s
associations with terror groups and some of his comments regarding
those who don’t toe the Islamist line.We
find it interesting that the Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR) would, once again, defend a person who writes hate-filled lines
insulting Jews for an Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP) pamphlet.But, considering the IAP’s
support for CAIR, maybe this is just a little “payback”?

CAIR’s
website copies a story from Agence France Presse
saying that Islam intends to initiate legal action against the United States
to determine just why he was not allowed to enter.Obviously, Mr. Islam doesn’t understand that he is not an
American citizen and has no pre-determined right to enter or leave the
United States at will…a right reserved exclusively to American citizens.

Mr. Islam’s final
statement is telling:

"Never
would I believe that such a thing could happen
in the land of the free - unfortunately, it did"

Isn’t it interesting
that Mr. Islam would acknowledge that the United States is the “land
of the free”, yet find it odd that Americans would not care to have
people in their country who are actively working to end that freedom?

No, Mr. Islam, we don’t
need your kind in our country, we have enough problems with the
terrorist supporters already present without having to import any more.

Hope the door didn’t
smack you in the rear on the way out.

Response To Reader
E-mail

ACAIR
recently received the following e-mail, which we’d like to share with
our readers:(note: this is the entire
text)

“It is people like you spreading the kind
of vicious half truths about decent people
that will bring about the destruction of civil liberties in the United States. Bigotry and
uniformed defamation of something you don't know and don't understand
are
the signposts of an ignorant person.”

To be honest, we usually
respond with a general acknowledgement and move on when we receive this
type of e-mail.However, we were intrigued
by this e-mail because it came from a university in the United Arab
Emirates (UAE).We answered the writer
(who didn’t provide a name) that we’d be responding in this “News &
Analysis” and would be sharing our answer with our readers.

A cursory look at the
recent history of the UAE shows that it has a state religion, no
universal suffrage and a spotty record regarding freedom of the press.In addition, there is only one political party
allowed and citizens are not encouraged to engage in meaningful
political debate.In
other words, a typical, repressive, and backward Middle Eastern regime.

This being the truth
about the UAE, we find it interesting that a citizen thereof would have
the capability of reasoning out just what constitutes “vicious half
truths” or just exactly what a “civil liberty” is.Consider that fewer than 1000 books a year are translated from
foreign languages into languages spoken in the Middle East (other than
Hebrew), that women are second class citizens and most citizens
wouldn’t know a voting ballot if they saw one, we question just who is
the “bigot” and “uninformed” party in this case?

The writer is correct
in one regard…ACAIR knows very little
about Islam and we, quite honestly, have no desire to learn.Our battle isn’t against Islam; our battle is
against Islamist terror, of which we do have a wealth of knowledge.No, we aren’t “experts” (nor do we pretend to
be) but we do know an Islamist terrorist or supporter when we see one.

As for civil liberties,
you will not find any group that more strongly defends our Constitution
from its many enemies than Anti-CAIR.

ADVISORY: Subscribers
are warned that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) may
contact your employer if CAIR believes you are using a work
address to receive any material that CAIR believes may be
offensive.CAIR
has been known to shame employers into firing employees CAIR finds
disagreeable. For that reason, we strongly suggest that corporate
e-mail users NOT use a corporate e-mail account/address when
communicating withACAIR
or CAIR.We
make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot
guarantee confidentiality. ACAIRdoes
not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing
list. We respect your privacy!

TIPS:
All persons are invited to submit tips and leads. ACAIR
will acknowledge receipt of all tips/leads, but we will NOT acknowledge
the source of ANY tip or lead in our Press Releases or on our web site.Exceptions
are made for leading media personalities at the discretion of ACAIR
and
only on request of the person(s) submitting the tip or lead.